-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Google formally unveils the "Stadia" launching in 2019
- Thread starter BAD
- Start date
I welcome a future of only turn-based strategy games and asynchronous multiplayer.
Took words straight out of my mought, I hope this doesn't have the effect I fear it will.
I saw a glimpse into a very radically different future of gaming.
One that is equally fascinating and terrifying. But considering the slow iterative evolution of the last few years, I think a shakeup was needed.
One that is equally fascinating and terrifying. But considering the slow iterative evolution of the last few years, I think a shakeup was needed.
It really isn't competitive. For that you'll have to wait until av1 is widespread (though it should be superior).
I found it interesting when they showed they are partnering with Simplygon and Havoc (amongst many others) given these are part of Microsoft. So it goes without saying that Microsoft will have been well aware of Google's plans for a long time.
I take a bit of it as a grain of salt cause he has his own streaming service but he knows what he is talking about
They why did they compare Stadia to PS4 and Xbox One in the conference?
*cries in data cap*
EDIT: I'm trying to verify this now, but this is likely being misinterpreted/was me getting bamboozled. Apologies, please disregard.
This is why Bronson gets laughed at and mocked. :P
They announced partnerships and support with many studios and technology stacks, as well as the founding a first party studio of their own. So yes there will be exclusives eventually.
And why would they integrate with Twitch, they have their own youtube gaming streaming, which a lot of streamers do use.
It's bad for developers too. It's missing essential and critical info. I used to think there was a chance you knew what you were talking about, but then you posted the screen of this thread from Google so I think we're done here.
Is this often and isn't a new console exciting in some way? ;-)
People get tired of their smartphones after two years.
We don't know it has no exclusive games. They haven't announced the lineup yet and I assume they'll do that at a consumer rather than developer focused event.
Conceptually it looks like the future for the masses. It's the literal evolution and bridge of mobile gaming which is on a completely different level in regards to user base. Once the platform and tech iterate and evolve a bit, it will most likely hit a point were it parallels the traditional console in relation to user experience.
Google is just laying down the pipework and foundation now because they know that the platform and tech will hit a tipping point in the not-so-distant future.
if you remember recently Netflix claimed that its biggest competitor is fortnite. All the major media companies realize that the real battle is for the attention and time of the user regardless of the medium. Hence for Google gaming is just an evolution and expansion of the core service model, that being user engagement for as long as possible.
Google is just laying down the pipework and foundation now because they know that the platform and tech will hit a tipping point in the not-so-distant future.
if you remember recently Netflix claimed that its biggest competitor is fortnite. All the major media companies realize that the real battle is for the attention and time of the user regardless of the medium. Hence for Google gaming is just an evolution and expansion of the core service model, that being user engagement for as long as possible.
Last edited:
Something I keep thinking about, is how exactly is this service going to have cross play anyway? Are they trying to say their first party games will play nice with the other consoles? Are they saying their service will be on PSN or Xbox live? I feel like they just wanted to throw the word cross play up there without any real meaning. It's still game dependent, like for example, playing Doom through Google against someone on Windows. I can believe that, but without any games it's just empty words.
Pull off what?
The latency depends on the distance to the cloud server.
Just hold a presentation in one of your data-centers and fix the latency problem entirely!
It's the Rainway guy, the streaming app that pretended it was coming to Switch to gain traction.
I think the big issue is enveiling it and hyping it and being kind of developer focused but not even giving devs enough to be hyped about
Sharing the same marketplace doesn't mean you aspire to snuff out the competion.
Even current platform holders recognize this,and welcome competition.
LEAVE ME BE, DEMON
(I wish I could verify it 100% but since I can't I ain't gonna double down)
Image quality and picture quality are often interchangeable terms when dealing with streaming video. Again, we've already had a Google test demo and despite there being a lower image quality over dedicated hardware, it wasn't to the point that you're describing. You're describing an extreme that just won't be reality despite the overall image quality being worse. It's not going to be a blurry unrecognizable mess.
I never said the convenience doesn't come without issues either. In fact my whole argument has been that people will take convenience despite those issues because the convenience outweighs what some of us call deal breaking issues around here. That's been my whole argument to begin with. Convenience will trump these other issues in the end for a lot of people and the issues won't be as bad as you're trying to make them out to be.
Also to say there's no compromise to my experience by going digital just isn't true either. I can't loan or borrow a game. I can't sell a game. I can't do a lot of things by going digital and that affects my overall experience. When it comes to movies, I'm hit with worse image quality and worse audio quality on top of all the other consumer right issues that come with it. But all of those issues that make me swear off digital just aren't issues for most people and I think things like latency to a certain degree, and image quality to a certain degree won't be a big enough difference to offset the $400 hardware that is the barrier to entry and the convenience factor of a single click of a button and you're in the game instantly. The bar level is going to be lower than you expect but at the same time these won't be unplayable messes either.
As a software engineer who works in distributed computing, I thought it was a pretty good conference, and pretty close to what I was expecting... Although I'm not a game developer. I thought it was pretty similar to Apple's WWDC keynotes, some morsels for the general enthusiast audience, but mostly focused on a roadmap for tech rollout.
Although like you, for the tech demos of like co-streaming, I didn't want to see Google's tech demo, I wanted to see how that technology could be implemented in a real game. They did that in a few areas, like showing how viewers of a game stream could jump into a game o f NBA 2K with the streamer, but not the examples that were most interesting to me.
As a game developer, why'd you think it's bad?
Maybe good, but you're at the mercy of your ISP. And ISPs in the USA...lol.
Comcast has a 1TB data cap. They charge extra for each additional 10gigs. Even on their gigabit tier which I had. I was hitting it every month.
With 4k movie streaming being the norm now, plus this gaming service -which how many Mb per second it may use, we don't know- have fun overpaying your Isp.
Unfortunately the gaming service maybe nice, but USA's ISP's are not up to task, be it speed and pricing wise. I was lucky enough my city has a gigabit fiber initiative with no data caps and lower pricing, and I ditched Comcast, but not everyone is that lucky.... Just saying.
Comcast has a 1TB data cap. They charge extra for each additional 10gigs. Even on their gigabit tier which I had. I was hitting it every month.
With 4k movie streaming being the norm now, plus this gaming service -which how many Mb per second it may use, we don't know- have fun overpaying your Isp.
Unfortunately the gaming service maybe nice, but USA's ISP's are not up to task, be it speed and pricing wise. I was lucky enough my city has a gigabit fiber initiative with no data caps and lower pricing, and I ditched Comcast, but not everyone is that lucky.... Just saying.
We didn't forget but 1st impressions matter and it was never treated as anything more but a side thing that wasent revealed with confidence unlike stadia. Its Why people look to the Wii for motion controls and not the games seen in arcades
I'm not seeing anything worthwhile in that thread. It is a competitor throwing dirt at another competitor. That's not exactly shocking or insightful.
No one but enthusiasts care about ownership. Physical media was a always means to an end to access your content to the majority (like 99%) of people. What matters more is if the thing works (eh?) and pricing (who even knows at this point). But also keep in mind the US isn't the center of the world. Our ISPs suck and we should fight to make the internet better but even in Eastern Europe, that's not an issue. Honestly I think streaming will make games more accessible than ever and probably change the way games are made. I mean imagine the skeptism around Netflix but not only has Netflix made watching movies and TV easier but we wouldn't have gotten stuff like Bojack Horseman, Stranger Things, or that Castlevania series.
But I still see this sentiment around in gamer circles and gamer circles tend to dictate the influence and messaging when it comes to these products, so who even knows if this is going to work because hardcore gamers just don't like it. But the "ownership" argument needs to go or at least reframed so it doesn't sound like it's selfish because fact of the matter is, a Chromebook and the price of a subscription is still going to be cheaper than a console and a few games and that kind of barrier being broken down is a good thing.
Also someone who's going to have a massive bias against Stadia for a pretty obvious reason. Pass.
What screen are you talking about, you sure you're not confusing me with one of the others you're arguing with.
I don't see how Microsofts xCloud is going to compete with this Google onslaught of tech. And they have Youtube as a channel for it, with billions of users.
If you want to develop games for it, you have no idea how the monetization will work. You have no idea what will realistically be possible for consumers because of a failure to address things like data caps, and you aren't given a very good idea of how they will address lag concerns.
Cost of entry and spread.
This tech could be amazing and could bring lots of people to their games.
However not knowing how much it'll cost the user/how do we get paid also without knowing the bandwidth requirements and the actual people that qualify it's hard to be excited.
Launch an amazing game on PS4 someone buys a PS4, downloads it and plays. Launch a game on this system and if they don't have strong enough internet for it they literally can't fix that unless they move
Wait until people on Comcast realize that they're paying data cap fees up to 50 bucks a month for this "inexpensive alternative."
Shit, I'm already paying an extra 10-20 bucks a month on top of 50-60 dollar games when I buy them.
I guess the biggest question on my mind when it comes to this is what does pricing look like? Am I going to be paying 60 dollars and I will be able to stream it and play it for as long as I want to, am I paying X number of dollars and only having access to the game for a certain number of days, or is this a monthly subscription service?
This in my mind is the biggest thing that will either make me very interested in this service or want nothing to do with it. While I wasn't in the beta for this, I'd like to think I have a fairly good internet connection to handle this so for me the biggest issue is pricing. What am I exactly paying for and what am I getting. If this is like buying a game digitally except I'm streaming it instead of downloading it and I have unlimited access I'd be very interested.
This in my mind is the biggest thing that will either make me very interested in this service or want nothing to do with it. While I wasn't in the beta for this, I'd like to think I have a fairly good internet connection to handle this so for me the biggest issue is pricing. What am I exactly paying for and what am I getting. If this is like buying a game digitally except I'm streaming it instead of downloading it and I have unlimited access I'd be very interested.
There is a lot of good stuff here, but some things feel a bit overblown - For example, saying the controller is "physically uncomfortable", while it looks perfectly fine and the few people who have actually used one (not this guy by the sounds of it) has said it feels comfortable enough.
Their point about dropped inputs is 100% valid though, and we already see it on Stream.
Here's a graph of how much data Youtube consumes. (The range you see is 30 fps vs 60 fps and HDR). So yeah, 4K 60 fps and HDR is 23GB per hour.
http:///8rmd.png
https://www.androidauthority.com/how-much-data-does-youtube-use-964560/
http:///8rmd.png
https://www.androidauthority.com/how-much-data-does-youtube-use-964560/
I've pretty much only read the OP, but I took it to mean cross-device, i.e. play on your laptop against your buddy who's playing on his phone, lol
Also, Phil Harrison? Again? I can't take that man seriously anymore (not that I could after E3 2006)
Those will be things you are going to likely get when you go talk to Google at GDC. They're details that Google probably doesn't want the general public to know at least for now which is why they didn't display them up yet. They may not even be finalized but you can be sure if you're a developer at the conference, you can probably set up a meeting with Google and get more details or a better general picture of what the structure will be like. I have a ton of questions myself about the financial structure but I wouldn't expect those to be disclosed at a live streaming announcement like that.
Not really, they just sell a software license and it's used for all sorts of gaming related stuff, they wouldn't have much to go on based just on that besides they are doing something gaming related.
